I'm trying to find what is the fastest ram I can use on my motherboard. I have an Asus P8Z68-V PRO/GEN3. Currently with an i7 2600k @4.7ghz. Multiplier is set at x47, 100mhz bus, 1.34volts. I also have 4x4gig 1600mhz Corsair Vengeance ram. Based on some new information that has come out saying that Battlefield 4 greatly benefits from higher ram speeds. I'm waiting on some more benchmarks to come out but if this proves true I want to upgrade my ram. In my bios settings it allows me to just select 2400mhz ram. I'm thinking 2x8gig sticks of 2400mhz ram by Gskill or Corsair. If I get this ram and just select 2400mhz in the options will it automatically run at the correct voltage and timings? Thanks

Before you upgrade your ram, what video card do you have? ( if older midrange card then you will notice way more benefit in BF4 and any game for that matter by upgrading to a newer faster card than by upgrading your 16 GB of DDR 3 1600 Mhz ram that you already own ).

The richest man is not he who has the most, but he who needs the least. No good deed goes unpunished...

There are a set of benchmarks out that show almost a 10 fps increase on BF4 by going from 1600mhz ram to 2400mhz ram but they were running a 780 SLI setup. And its posted on Corsairs website. I'm sure they want to sell some RAM of course. So i'm waiting to see some more impartial benchmarks. I just want to be prepared if there is going to be that much of a performance increase.

So they used slightly faster memory than you ( 1866 Mhz ) vs your still speedy 1600 Mhz ... but you have 16 GB and they only used 8 GB so that should help performance more ( higher capacity vs slightly slower frequency ).

Honestly you have a pretty damn fast system already... very strong video card... and a ton of ram... I would wait till BF4 launches and try it on your system, then decide about the ram upgrade.

I think the game will be very playable on your current system, increasing the ram speed would only be good for a few percentage points tbh, a few more fps if that... I would wait...cheers!

BTW, if you want to sell your 780 one day for cheap, lemme know!

Edit: Found more Beta BF4 benchies that do include your GTX 780 card:

Testing at maximum quality settings 2560x1600 NO MSAA :

Testing at maximum quality settings 2560×1600 MSAA 4X

They tested at 2560x1600 above which takes a bit more performance than the 2560x1440 resolution you plan to run the game at, so keep that in mind too here...

At such a high resolution you do not even really "need" any AA at all... jaggies are so small at that high res... MSAA takes too much of a performance hit at that resolution, you could use nVidia's FXAA instead, it has very little performance hit compared to MSAA, and still looks just as good ( at least imho ). Yes I know MSAA is "superior" but the performance hit is too high with all settings maxed out at 2560x1600( or 1440) so unless you want to buy another 780 card and SLi it ( way too expensive methinks ), just be happy with your rig the way it is, and use FXAA instead of MLAA and you should be all set.

Remember that nVidia can still improve their driver for this game slightly too , either by game launch or shortly afterwards as they typically do for new titles... so that will help a bit as well. You are best off waiting to see how the game actually runs on your system before making any upgrades methinks...

Exactly 1 week till BF4 launches!! ( Oct. 29th )

The richest man is not he who has the most, but he who needs the least. No good deed goes unpunished...

You could try pushing your cpu a bit further if you like...if you have really good cooling on it ( and it sounds like you do ), you might get a bit more out of it ( 4.9 or 5.0 Ghz ) if really lucky, depends on your cpu and "luck of the draw".

I suppose $200 is not all that much to blow on ram, considering the cost of your other components, and the fact you can sell your current used ram to help cover the cost of the new ram...

Still, I think you should wait ( as you said you would ) and try the game before doing the ram upgrade...cheers!

The richest man is not he who has the most, but he who needs the least. No good deed goes unpunished...

I tried upping to 4.8ghz and I got a BSOD running prime95. I'm not sure what settings I should change to get that higher clock rate. I have a Corsair H80i liquid cooler. V core is set to 1.35ghz. Multiplier is 47 and FSB is 100. Should I up the Vcore to 1.4 or set the cpu capability from 100% to 110% before I up the vcore?

I’ve been doing testing on Haswell to determine whether or not higher speed memory could improve system and specifically gaming performance, especially with multi-GPU systems. My intuition and some of the research I’ve read online suggests that Haswell’s “sweet spot” memory speed has actually jumped from the time-honored 1600MHz to 1866MHz. What I found with Battlefield 4 is remarkable, though. Testing on an i7-4770K overclocked to 4.4GHz and two overclocked GeForce GTX 780s in SLI, I discovered that memory speed affects Battlefield 4 performance in a very measurable and perceptible way. Check this out:

Where things get really exciting is in surround at a monstrous 5760x1200. Ordinarily this is a situation where the system will become totally GPU bound, yet Battlefield 4 again demonstrates a performance uptick going from DDR3-1600 to DDR3-2400. Average framerates are up 15.2%, and the all-important minimum framerate goes up 22.9%! Recognizing that these are rough figures culled from FRAPS runs in fairly empty maps, it’s still a large enough difference to be outside of the margin of error and more importantly, it’s a perceptible one. Playing the open beta in surround, I found that the faster 2400MHz on the memory made the game noticeably smoother and eliminated a substantial amount of stutter.

Okay, a few things to point out here. Yes there were some nice gains by switching from 1600 Mhz to 2400 Mhz, but remember, they achieved this on TWO GTX 780's in SLi mode, and you have a single 780 card...so the gains will be smaller ( fewer fps ) on a single 780 than a pair of them...by how much I dunno, but definitely smaller gains to be had with single gpu and faster ram...

Also, they used newer Haswell cpu, so the memory controller on that might be more efficient than your Sandy Bridge cpu, again, giving a higher gain with faster frequency ram than what you might experience on your system...could be wrong here, but it is something to consider...

The Haswell i7 4770K using the same standard 1600 Mhz memory scores 18534 MB/s in that same test.

That is a difference of about 2000 MB/s in DDR-3 Read Speed performance ( 11% difference ) between Sandy Bridge and Haswell when both run same memory speed!!! Haswell has an 11% faster memory advantage when you run both memory at 1600 Mhz as a baseline...important to note this.

Once you drop in 2400 Mhz memory into the new Haswell platform, Read Speed increases to 24029 MB/s which is a 31% difference. ( compared to Sandy Bridge with 1600 Mhz memory that is ).

However, you will not see as massive a gain in fps in BF4 as this guy did, because 1) he is using dual 780's in SLi mode, and 2) Sandy Bridge 2600K platform memory read speed is about 11% slower than Haswell platform memory read speed in benchy above , meaning you will see probably less than half the gains that this guy did, if you do decide to switch from 1600 Mhz to 2400 Mhz ram in your system... just saying...

If you really want to make BF4 faster, the best ( and most expensive thing of course ) is to add another 780 in SLi. The other thing is to sell your cpu and ram, and use the money for new Haswell platform with faster ram in it...this would be cheaper than buying a new 780 ( but not by much ) of course, but are the gains really worth it?

Try the game first, then decide...

The richest man is not he who has the most, but he who needs the least. No good deed goes unpunished...

I tried upping to 4.8ghz and I got a BSOD running prime95. I'm not sure what settings I should change to get that higher clock rate. I have a Corsair H80i liquid cooler. V core is set to 1.35ghz. Multiplier is 47 and FSB is 100. Should I up the Vcore to 1.4 or set the cpu capability from 100% to 110% before I up the vcore?

The obvious this is the main voltage you need to make the adjustment when you increase the CPU frequency.Remember, Sandy Bridge is 32nm chip so it doesn't need as much voltage as the 45 or 65nm chips. I wouldsuggest to keep this voltage below 1.40v is the max or keep the core load temperature under 70°C (more detailsabout thermal later on). Keep in mind, the higher Vcore the heat will be generated by the CPU. I wouldn't recommend using over 1.35v for daily usage or unless you have good cooler.

According to Intel white sheet, the maximum voltage for Core Processor is 1.52v, however I wouldn't recommend you to run it for 24/7

Sandy Bridge is responsive to vCore adjustments and very little else...at least that we have seen yet. It does not seem to like super cooling either. However a modest vCore of 1.4v Core got us to 4.7GHz on the 2500K

Since you already have your 2600K at 4.7 Ghz with 1.35 cpu volts, that is as fast as it will go unless you up the cpu voltage to 1.4 volts, any higher voltage and you risk killing it with higher voltage...I recommend you leave it where it is at 4.7 Ghz to ensure stability and a longer cpu life unless you try 1.4 volts and mebbe get 4.8 or 4.9 Ghz out of it...try it and see... honestly 4.7 Ghz is pretty fast and I don't think an extra 100 or 200 Mhz cpu speed will make any noticeable difference in your games...rather stable system than system on the edge and premature cpu burnout...

The richest man is not he who has the most, but he who needs the least. No good deed goes unpunished...

CPU Current Capability can be set to 140% to increase the CPU VRM over-current trip threshold. This allows the CPU integrated voltage regulator to drain more current from the Extreme Engine DIGI+ III, allowing the processor to achieve higher operating frequencies and increased software loads at those frequencies.

Sure, set it to 110 or 120%... it allows more current to the cpu...just don't go too nuts with it!

The richest man is not he who has the most, but he who needs the least. No good deed goes unpunished...

Sorry this has turned into an overclocking thread in the hardware section. But i guess i don't understand what the CPU capability feature is in the BIOS. If I am leaving my voltage at 1.35 which is what people in the forum seem to recommend. Does changing my cpu capability to 110 or 120 actually push more voltage to my CPU without actually changing my 1.35volts setting? I guess what I am trying to accomplish is 4.8ghz or higher without going above 1.35volts. Will setting my cpu to 110 or 120 percent give me that while stable? Without causing my cpu anymore stress then my current 4.7ghz overclock. Of course I guess I won't really know until I try it but i'm hoping for some educated guessing from the fine folks here at Xbitlabs

Not voltage, current... according to the Asus manual definition I posted above, "CPU Current Capability" allows the VRM's on your motherboard ( Voltage Regulator Module ) to pass higher amounts of current ( in amperes, not volts ) before "tripping" ( safety shutoff point ) to your cpu.

A voltage regulator module (VRM) is an installable module that senses a computer's microprocessor voltage requirements and ensures that the correct voltage is maintained. If you are changing your computer's microprocessor (for example, changing from a Pentium to a Pentium Pro or a Pentium with MMX ), you need to add a voltage regulator module to the existing voltage regulator in the motherboard so that the new voltage requirements can be detected and accommodated.

In the case of the Pentium, the original Pentium has the same voltage requirement for its core or basic operation as for its I/O operation. Both use 2.8 volts. However, the Pentium Pro and the Pentium with MMX have different voltage requirements for core (2.8 volts) and I/O (3.3 volts). Adding a VRM allows it to regulate the voltage for I/O while the original regulator built into the motherboard continues to regulate core voltage.

Original Pentium cpu lol!! But the idea of VRM remains the same on modern boards and cpu's today.

A voltage regulator module or VRM, sometimes called PPM (processor power module), is a buck converter that provides a microprocessor the appropriate supply voltage, converting +5 V or +12 V to a much lower voltage required by the CPU, allowing processors with different supply voltage to be mounted on the same motherboard. Some are soldered to the motherboard while others are installed in an open slot. Some processors, such as Intel's Haswell, feature voltage regulation components on the same package as the CPU, instead of the motherboard.[1] Most modern CPUs require less than 1.5 V. CPU designers tend to design to smaller CPU core voltages; lower voltages help reduce CPU power dissipation, often referred to as thermal design power (TDP).

Some voltage regulators provide a fixed supply voltage to the processor, but most of them sense the required supply voltage from the processor, essentially acting as a continuously-variable adjustable regulator. In particular, VRMs that are soldered to the motherboard are supposed to do the sensing, according to the Intel specification.

Modern graphics processing units (GPU) also use a VRM due to higher power and current requirements.

So what you are doing is allowing more current to pass through the VRM's to the cpu, before they "trip" from having too high of a current passed through them.

If you go above 100% value, this means you are risking too much current being sent to the cpu..by raising the "Trip Threshold" when the VRM's tell the cpu to throttle back and reduce voltage/frequency similar to when the cpu might overheat and "Thermal Throttling" kicks in. Same sort of idea here for increasing current limit allowed to pass through the VRM to the cpu. So if you only increase it by 10 or 20%, you are giving more current to your cpu, which helps make extreme overclocking of your cpu more stable, at some slight risk of damaging the cpu from over-current ( same as you risk your cpu by over-volting it to achieve higher stable overclock ). So I would bump it up by 10% and see if you can get any more speed out of your cpu. If not, bump it up to 120% total, and see if that helps... if not, give up at that point and just leave it at standard 100%. It might not make any difference at all for your overclock, but it is possible it might help you achieve a slightly higher overclock...good luck!

Based on all overclock results I have seen with Sandy Bridge cpu's, you need to increase your cpu's Vcore to 1.4 volts in order to get it stable above 4.7 Ghz... is all this really worth it just to gain an extra 100 or 200 Mhz higher overclock? I doubt you would notice it in gaming or anything else tbh. You can try for higher of course, but you will have to really "push" your cpu hard in order to get it near 5.0 Ghz...and risk burning it out prematurely doing it...

If you really want more gaming performance, the best thing to do is wait for GTX 780 to go on sale at Christmas/Boxing Day and buy another one for SLi mode...

The richest man is not he who has the most, but he who needs the least. No good deed goes unpunished...

Yeah I don't know if I really want to go above 4.7ghz or not. But its awfully tempting when its a free performance boost! If anything it is good overclocking knowledge to have.

I heard that some sites are selling the 780 for about $550 now. Maybe by Christmas they will be down to $500. Since you can get a 290X for $550 and its slightly more powerful I would think a 780 should be priced around $500 before to long.

After having played battlefield 4 for a while I would say my system handles it quite well. Its very smooth and fast at 2560X1440, Ultra everything, HBAO, 4X AA. I haven't seen any other game though raise my system temps quite like this. It got my cpu up to 50C and my 780 to 59C after 30 minutes of playing. My cpu usually idles around 23C to 27C and not too much higher playing other games.

Yeah that makes the nearly $700 I spent on my HOF 780 back in September really hurt. With as well as BF4 is running on my single card I am not really seeing any advantage to adding a second one to my system. Perhaps by next summer I may add a second one. I'm assuming the 800 series or whatever they will call them will be out by then and there will be deeper price cuts on the 780 by then.